Norwich will never be a bigger club than Ipswich

[Lessingham Canary 99]

@ Lappinitup;-March 2011 - "Council deputy leader John Carnall says the club

have so far not paid them back rent of just over £500,000 and that the

situation could ultimately result in legal action"Dec 2013 - "Town joint-managing director Ian Milne has insisted that Town are on a

sound financial footing despite the club failing to pay local suppliers

and players’ agents on time." Feb 2016 - "A club spokesperson told TWTD in a statement: “A service provider issued

a court petition for non-payment between Christmas and New Year whereby

their automated process accelerated this action despite an agreement

for payment to be made early January."

The service provider turned out to be the taxman. So that statement was a barefaced lie.

And just recently.......

"Ipswich Town Football Club has won its appeal in a battle over the cost of policing matches."

So, as well as subsidising their ground, local taxpayers are having to foot the bill for matchday policing now.

You say ethics doesn''t come into it, but when did you last see NCFC with these sort of headlines?

Post of the month, well said Lapps!

[Bill 1,788]

"I do agree with Lincoln that if we stay down for a while then the same will happen to us"oh dearthat is the whole point, it hasn''tyou might just as well say anyone of us is equal to a billionaire ... because if he lost all his money he would be the same as us

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Rhubarb"]"I do agree with Lincoln that if we stay down for a while then the same will happen to us"oh dearthat is the whole point, it hasn''tyou might just as well say anyone of us is equal to a billionaire ... because if he lost all his money he would be the same as us[/quote]

Eh? Your posts are bemusing. That analogy makes no sense what so ever.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="lincoln canary Golden Coppel"]As for the ethical argument, i''m not really sure where you''ve plucked that one from.[/quote]Let''s try this........March 2011 - "Council deputy leader John Carnall says the club

have so far not paid them back rent of just over £500,000 and that the

situation could ultimately result in legal action"Dec 2013 - "Town joint-managing director Ian Milne has insisted that Town are on a

sound financial footing despite the club failing to pay local suppliers

and players’ agents on time." Feb 2016 - "A club spokesperson told TWTD in a statement: “A service provider issued

a court petition for non-payment between Christmas and New Year whereby

their automated process accelerated this action despite an agreement

for payment to be made early January."

The service provider turned out to be the taxman. So that statement was a barefaced lie.

And just recently.......

"Ipswich Town Football Club has won its appeal in a battle over the cost of policing matches."

So, as well as subsidising their ground, local taxpayers are having to foot the bill for matchday policing now.

You say ethics doesn''t come into it, but when did you last see NCFC with these sort of headlines?

[/quote]

Fair paint Lappin. But in the context of this argument about club size, how is this relevant?

And for the point, I''m sure Chase was guilty of some pretty unethical actions. But you make a good point that of recent years, our morales have been spot on.

[Guest]

Funny how people can fall out on here just debating whether a team in another county and 43 miles away is bigger or smaller. Lets have an unbiased poll.

Sunday, they will be the Auld Enemy and then on Monday it will be Arsenal to discuss. If we win or not lose we will have the bragging rights which is the most important I believe.

[lake district canary 4,531]

The doom and gloom of "if we stay down there the same will happen to us" is a strange one.  The way Ipswich have deteriorated is because they started out from low point and through their owner they have just got into a worse and worse situation.    Because of our successes we start from a relatively high point and even when getting setbacks, have had the player assetts and financial clout to be able to consolidate the club - and even if we don''t get promotion this season, would not be in anywhere near the hamstrung place Ipswich appear to be in.  They are on small attendances and are only able to keep afloat because Evans takes on the shortfall in the running costs himself - in other words incresing the debt each season and reliance on him bailing them out, with  little or no investment in the team or stadium in over eight years.  We have little or no debt, they have around £90m debt.  Size is therefore irrelevant - in fact size doesn''t come into it - it''s what you do with what you''ve got that matters. They are up the creek and totally reliant on Evans to stay afloat but with no prospect of money coming from him to boost promotion chances.  

From the Swiss Ramble - "From a cash perspective Ipswich basically balance the books,

but only because Evans increases his loan each year, as the cash flow from

operating activities remains stubbornly negative. In the last decade Evans has

provided £46.3 million via £32.8 million of loans and a £13.5 million increase

in share capital. Financing has also come from £7.4 million of net player sales

and a £1.5 million reduction in the cash balance.

However, the lack of investment over the last eight years is

striking with just £0.2 million being spent on infrastructure improvements in

the Evans era, i.e. virtually nothing on the stadium. Instead, almost all of

the funding has been used to simply cover the club’s operating losses.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

Lakey - its not strange, its true although i don;t think our support will diminish to quite the same level because the core support is currently stronger.

The challenge though is that we have owners who have made it clear they will not bankroll us at all in the future nor will then prop up the club running at a loss by incurring or underwriting debt as Evans effectively does. he may not be putting in cash to improve them significantly but him taking on and allowing them to accumulate debt is what keeps them vaguely competitive in the championship. We will have to continuously sell players instead, until we run out of players to sell............

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Lakey - its not strange, its true although i don;t think our support will diminish to quite the same level because the core support is currently stronger.

The challenge though is that we have owners who have made it clear they will not bankroll us at all in the future nor will then prop up the club running at a loss by incurring or underwriting debt as Evans effectively does. he may not be putting in cash to improve them significantly but him taking on and allowing them to accumulate debt is what keeps them vaguely competitive in the championship. We will have to continuously sell players instead, until we run out of players to sell............[/quote]That is rather contradictory.We will continue to live within our means, unlike the debt junkies down the road. We have therefore cut of cloth to fit ie no parachute payments next season.  Player sales are a reflection of the need to cut wage costs rather than as a means to raise money.Players will always find ''their level'' Naughty NCFC did not ''sell'' Jacob Murphy. He was offered a better deal ina higher league. just as Johnson. Snodgrass and Howson were. As was Maddison. That is the nature of the game, not some pantomime wicked step mother scenario.As to the paupers what is not mentioned is that money from player sales are handed over to a group within ME where they are used as cheap loans - that some of it comes back to balance the books is hardly an investment or pumping mo,ey in as the dimwitted farmhands would have.The difference apart from size IS the ownership. Ours which includes a huge fan ownership are in it for the love of the club, not the love of money

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Lakey - its not strange, its true although i don;t think our support will diminish to quite the same level because the core support is currently stronger.

The challenge though is that we have owners who have made it clear they will not bankroll us at all in the future nor will then prop up the club running at a loss by incurring or underwriting debt as Evans effectively does. he may not be putting in cash to improve them significantly but him taking on and allowing them to accumulate debt is what keeps them vaguely competitive in the championship. We will have to continuously sell players instead, until we run out of players to sell............[/quote]

So you would rather have an Evans type owner than a Delia type owner??  One taking on debt but without doing anything to strengthen the team or develop the stadium, or one that wants to keep the club safe from debt?   After all debt has to be repaid at some stage and he way Ipswich are going...or not going....they can only get in it deeper and deeper. 

[Jim Smith 2,317]

I don;t know to be perfectly honest. A Delia type owner is fine/great whilst you are in receipt of premier league TV monies. Once that is no longer the case I think things have the potential to go pear shaped very quickly financially or alternatively our ability to compete will recede very quickly.

I''m no fan of Marcus Evans i''m merely pointing out that his ownership of that club does enable them to at least compete in the championship. I''m concerned that our model will see us not even be able to do that soon.

[Bill 1,788]

er noThe Marcus Evans type is one where the club is being bled dry whilst acting as a tax avoidance vehicle, To say just avoiding relegation is competing is absurd.The model we have is one of accountability and progress. We are preparing for next season''s budget, have a healthy youth system where a number of promising youngsters have been recruited and they will progress. It allso looks like we have the ability to undentify players from abroad who can succeed and are cost effective. What would we have paid for Zimmerman and Trybull in the UK ?

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]I''m no fan of Marcus Evans i''m merely pointing out that his ownership of that club does enable them to at least compete in the championship. I''m concerned that our model will see us not even be able to do that soon.[/quote]They have an average gate of 16,000, ours is almost 10k more.Those extra 10k fans will also buy food, drinks, merchandise etc.They have to pay rent for their stadium and training ground - we don''t.We have restaurants earning us money throughout the year - they don''t.They outsource their matchday catering and just take a percentage of the profits, we get to keep all ours.Their turnover (income) last year was £14m and expected to fall this year - even without Sky money we would turnover at least £25m. So, even with Evans reputed £4/5m annual cash injection, they would still be way behind us.NEXT!

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Both clubs are fairly similar in terms of size and prestige, and fairly insignificant when compared to many other clubs.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

To most of the football world we’re seen as a middling yo yo club. Ipswich are completely irrelevant to most football fans. They cling onto their history, but no one else gives a f uck. Norwich fans never profess that we’re a big club, but in Ipswich’s case there are serveral in the division that absolutely dwarf them. They also have a desperately insecure and delusional fan base. No one gives two hoots about ITFC and in the last few years we have been a far more famous club. This absolutely tears them apart.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]I don;t know to be perfectly honest. A Delia type owner is fine/great whilst you are in receipt of premier league TV monies. Once that is no longer the case I think things have the potential to go pear shaped very quickly financially or alternatively our ability to compete will recede very quickly.

I''m no fan of Marcus Evans i''m merely pointing out that his ownership of that club does enable them to at least compete in the championship. I''m concerned that our model will see us not even be able to do that soon.[/quote]

Why does this painting of Evans not include the money he takes out of the club. Is it to make him look benevolent compared to our owners? Why would you do that?

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

This thread is off on a right tangent here.

Not sure why discussing ethics and morales is relevant to a discussion about club size. Leicester City owners seem pretty immoral and unethical, but I doubt many would argue against the fact they are a bigger club than us.

I think we really need to determine a suitable methodology for determining size. Which is, I think, virtually impossible.

Determining the current better performing club is easier. I would accept the attendance argument in this case, as an indicator. League status and position should also be considered, as well as recent (last 12 months) head to heads. I question the validity of the finances argument. For me, this factor is too complicated - and as I pointed out previously, you need to consider financial liabilities when considering assets.

Norwich and Ipswich are evenly matched on head to heads from last season, and current league placing. But currently Norwich easily trump Ipswich on attendances. So Its reasonable to conclude Norwich currently are a better performing club, in my book anyway.

As for size, who knows. Andy Marshall said there is nothing between Norwich and Ipswich. Not that he''d say anything different mind.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

Or perhaps size is solely determine by financial clout? Perhaps the club with the bigger turnover is the bigger club? After all, this is the measure for companies.

[hogesar 9,671]

All i know is Ipswich a hole of a place with a dump of a stadium, everything about the club is scummy and horrible. Cant really blame only 7 fans turning up, the place smacks of being ignored for 20 years but clinging onto whatever history they can.

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

As mentioned elsewhere, their nice but dim captain Luke ''fist pump'' Chambers has joined in now and is glowing about the three stars nonsense, all for achievements before he was even born.

Somebody on the Talksport site (Bloomfield?) ridicules this adequately:

"Ipswich Town have three stars on their shirt. Does this signify three top flight titles like Huddersfield? Nope. Multiple European success, like Liverpool? Nah. A hat-trick of FA Cups? No chance. Ipswich''s three stars commemorate the three major trophies they''ve won; the First Division in 1962, FA Cup in 1978 and UEFA Cup in 1981. Why not chuck in the 1973 Texaco Cup win? Or the three Suffolk Premier Cups in 1968, ''69 and ''70?

These have got to be the most ridiculous stars since the last series of Big Brother."

I particularly like the final sentence.

[lake district canary 4,531]

The past record of clubs counts very little for the present day state of a club.  Having a proud history is great to have - but are Blackpool still a big club after their successes 70 years ago?  Are Luton a big club because they did well in the late 50''s?  No.  You are where you are. At this present moment Norwich, from top to bottom, are in a far better state than Ipswich.  The binners'' stars are something to be proud of for them and a reminder of their past achievements, but those achievements are well in the past and are meaningless in regarding their present day status, as are our achievements of the past great to look back on, but are meaningless in the sense of where we are now.   You are where you are now as a club and looking at our stadium, our catchent area, the community work done by the club, the attendances we get, the quality of footballers we have, the progressive management set up we have, the respect that the owners hold in the wider world......well, there is no comparison with the club 40 miles down the road.  That could change, but maybe pigs might fly one day....

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Good post, ldc 👍🏻

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="lake district canary"]The past record of clubs counts very little for the present day state of a club.  Having a proud history is great to have - but are Blackpool still a big club after their successes 70 years ago?  Are Luton a big club because they did well in the late 50''s?  No.  You are where you are. At this present moment Norwich, from top to bottom, are in a far better state than Ipswich.  The binners'' stars are something to be proud of for them and a reminder of their past achievements, but those achievements are well in the past and are meaningless in regarding their present day status, as are our achievements of the past great to look back on, but are meaningless in the sense of where we are now.   You are where you are now as a club and looking at our stadium, our catchent area, the community work done by the club, the attendances we get, the quality of footballers we have, the progressive management set up we have, the respect that the owners hold in the wider world......well, there is no comparison with the club 40 miles down the road.  That could change, but maybe pigs might fly one day....[/quote]That would require them to have an airportWhich along with many other things, they don''t have

otherwise spot on

[hogesar 9,671]

LDC gets it [:)]

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

I''m famous my entire post now constitutes a thread on TWTD.

As follows:

"Ipswich Town''s ephemeral and rather freakish season in the sun pales into insignificance in historical terms when compared to the genuine football-history of the likes of the Preston North Ends, the Huddersfields, the Boltons and many others.

In today''s new world "size" as it is is assessed by wealth, by support and by the amount of seasons spent at the top table. That''s the way it is now. They are the criteria.

In all those aspects we outstrip ITFC by quite a bit. The binners with their obsession with their history, embarrassing as it is, don''t like it and dismiss these factors as readily as they do their fall from grace with administration and the subsequent shafting of local businesses and charities.

As I have stated before this obsession is all they have now and reveals nothing more than an innate inferiority complex. "

Thickoos retort:-

"So they''re bigger than us because...Preston North End, Huddersfield, and Bolton have won stuff too?"

Eh?

This particular dope''s curious deduction from what I posted is to be expected in it''s stupidity I suppose and the resulting contributions from the likes of mullet head and others are all so intellectually bereft as usual they they are not worth repetition. Inferiority complex just confirmed.

But, they are wound up in quite a big way. Mission accomplished. The ''History Boys'' can''t help it can they?

I just hope that their decaying ground can withstand a relatively big crowd on Sunday and doesn''t collapse.

[hogesar 9,671]

The best bit is they think their players are just as good as ours.

Dont get me wrong, anyone can beat anyone on a given day but if they dont think that Klose, Pinto, Trybull, Tettey, Stiepermann, Wildshut, Murphy, Maddison, Pritchard, Hoolahan, Jerome and Oliviera wouldn''t walk into their first eleven theyre deluded.

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

So obviously correct H, but delusion is their prop these days.

I''m enjoying this derby build up as never before. Perhaps because I''ve had time on my hands with a couple of days of house arrest with the fluesy woosey.

I''ve now been described as follows by a backwater boy:

"You are always going to get some deranged internet loudmouth with personal issues who goes on like this."

If only he/they knew.

Mission accomplished (easily done.)

[TIL 1010 4,746]

https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/416114/things-are-getting-desperate-over-on-the-pink-un-message-board/#26They have it in for you Broady and poor old Tangy. They cannot tell difference between him and his bro Crafty either. [:D]

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

I love the rivalry.

I want the three points and the bragging rights.

The victories in recent years have been great, but............

when I think of Wark, Whymark, Mills, Beattie, Mariner, Burley and so on I remember what it was to truly feel desperate for a derby result.

I struggle to name a Town player these days but I suspect our players have been on Town supporter''s lips for years.

I am glad then that we have a passionate manager in Farke. The same Daniel Farke who embraces cup matches. He will reignite the passion in our side at a time when Town have more cause to want to beat us than we them because of recent history. This is key. We have been reinvented and the squad are close and playing for each other with commitment. I think Town fans are in for a shock when they see the likes of Trybull and Maddison and DF on the sidelines.

But for me it is all about three points. Try as I might I can''t hate Ipswich (a provincial club like us) anywhere near the way I hate the likes of Liverpool or Man Utd or Chelsea or Arsenal for that matter. Part of this might be because those smug EPL Clubs (and the MoTD pundits who wet themselves over them) look at us with ignorance and contempt whereas those South Folk look at us North Folk as rivals who matter and we do the same to them. Each will recognise the other this weekend through the banter, abuse and tribal history of ancient regions steeped in history and that is why the game is so significant.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

This Bolshie Budgie sounds a rummun'' old character. Is he our version of Ipswich Crazy?

I just don''t get the people who say the binners are the same sort of club as us. They just aren''t by any stretch of imagination. Have some pride in what we have. It won''t be like this forever.

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

"This Bolshie Budgie sounds a rummun'' old character. Is he our version of Ipswich Crazy?"

No, not really. I don''t do video as I''m not as photogenic as him.

Great fun though ..... during those boring moments that is.